TUTORIAL

The first tutorial is an introductory discussion about the New Zealand constitution. It has
two parts. Part A covers essential aspects of the existing New Zealand political and
constitutional system. This foundational knowledge will be necessary as we examine how
the constitution operates. This part of the tutorial consists of multi-choice questions (and
an online quiz).

The second part of the tutorial, Part B, sets the scene for an open-ended discussion about
whether New Zealand should adopt a written constitution. It encourages you to think
critically. You are asked to consider two competing statements and then reflect on which
one you find the most convincing and why. As you do this, try to reflect on your own
viewpoint – why do you think that? What assumptions underlie your answer? What
implications flow from your answer?

PART A

Answer the following questions in advance of the tutorial and be prepared to discuss your answers
(there may be more than one correct answer). Some of these questions also feature in the
online quiz for this tutorial. Please complete the quiz separately online.
(in answering these questions, these resources may be helpful: The Cabinet Manual:
https://dpmc.govt.nz/our-business-units/cabinet-office/supporting-work-cabinet/cabinet-
manual; Parliament: https://www.parliament.nz/en/ ; Electoral Commission
https://elections.nz/

1. Which of these descriptions best describes the New Zealand Constitutional System?

1. Presidential
2. Federal
3. Mixed member proportional
4. Unicameral parliamentary democracy

2.The Prime Minister of New Zealand is:

1. Directly elected by the people

2. Directly elected by Parliament
 3. The leader of the party or coalition which commands the majority of the
House of Representatives
4. Decided under a coalition agreement

3.The New Zealand Head of State is

1. The King in right of New Zealand

2. The Governor-General of New Zealand
3. The Chief Justice
4. The Prime Minister

4.Which of the following is

true? Cabinet Ministers are:

1. Chosen by the party which holds the majority in Parliament

2. Chosen by the Prime Minister
3. Chosen by the coalition agreement
4. Members of parliament
5. Appointed by the Governor-General

5.The Attorney-General is:

1. An unelected public official

2. A lawyer member of Parliament
3. A member of the executive government
4. The head of the Crown law office

6.Judges in New Zealand are:

1. Elected by the people

2. Chosen with the consent of Parliament
3. Appointed by the Governor-General or Attorney-General according to the Senior
Courts Act

7.Which of the following may be sources of the constitution of New Zealand:

1. Ordinary Acts of the New Zealand Parliament

2. International treaties
3. Constitutional conventions
4. Treaty of Waitangi and the Declaration of Independence
5. Tikanga
6. The Cabinet Office Manual
 7. Acts of the UK Parliament
8. Judicial decisions
9. Press conferences held by the Prime Minister
10. Constitution Act (NZ) 1986
11. Constitutional law textbooks

8.Which of the following is true? New Zealand elections are

1. Held by secret ballot

2. Take place on a Saturday
3. Controlled by the independent Electoral Commission

9.The New Zealand Parliament has

1. A fixed three year term

2. A four year term
3. A three year term

10.Which of the following is true? New Zealand’s electoral system allows voters to:

1. Rank the candidates in order of preference

2. Choose the party they want to form the government
3. Identify as Maori in order to vote for a Maori electorate
4. Choose the candidate they prefer
5. Have two votes

11. A conscience vote in Parliament allows MPs to:

1. Vote according to personal preference without reference to the party whip

2. Vote according to the party manifesto
3. Canvas the views of voters and vote accordingly.

12. A supreme law constitution is:

1. Written down
2. Entrenched against change by ordinary processes
3. One in which judges have power to invalidate legislation that violates the
constitution.

13. Who gets to decide electoral boundaries in New Zealand?

1. The party who is in government

2. Parliament
 3. The political parties in negotiation
4. A statutory body
5. The judges

Reflecting on these answers, how much of New Zealand’s constitution is determined by

politics? Why might we need the courts also to have a role?

Part B

This part of the tutorial is a discussion about written and unwritten constitutions. As you
answer these questions, try to reflect on your own viewpoint – why do you think that? What
assumptions underlie your answer? What implications flow from your answer?

• What is the difference between a “written” and an “unwritten” constitution? What

do you think might be the advantages / disadvantages of each?

• What challenges are faced in creating a written constitution in New Zealand? Do you
think these difficulties could be overcome? Should New Zealand have a written
constitution?

• Consider the below excerpts from Palmer/Butler and Barber. Which statement do
you find the most convincing (or not) and why?

Geoffrey Palmer and Andrew Butler, A Constitution for Aotearoa New Zealand (Victoria
University Press, Wellington, 2016) ch 1

“New Zealand’s present constitution is dangerously incomplete, obscure, fragmentary and

far too flexible. It remorselessly evolves with political developments and is subject to few
limits. It evolves in obscure and unpredictable ways that are not transparent. That is the
trouble with such a political constitution. Our constitution is not fully fit for purpose in the
political and social realities of modern New Zealand. That needs to change. New Zealand
needs a constitution fit for the modern age.”

Nick Barber, ‘Against a written constitution’ (2008) 1 Public Law 11

“the adoption of [a written constitution] would be a hazardous affair; … it risks forcing

through unpopular or concealed changes to the constitution, … it risks shifting political
power from democratic institutions towards the judiciary, and … it risks unnecessarily
provoking a destabilising constitutional crisis. Having set out the objections to a written
constitution, the weight of the argument then shifts to its advocates: given that a written
constitution is not necessary, they must show that its benefits outweigh its dangers.”